With another child on the way, Troy Young and his wife decided to
enlarge their small midtown home. But instead of the conventional
route, they chose to go green.
“I’m convinced it’s a good idea,” Young says. “The cost is
negligibly higher (but results in an) increased property value and
energy savings.”
The couple will shortly begin a project to redo their existing
two-bedroom house by installing new windows, low-flow plumbing fixtures
and a high-efficiency cooling system, plus adding insulation. At the
same time, they’ll build a 1,100-square foot addition.
Since the city of Tucson didn’t have a program for residential green
renovations, Young turned to Pima County.
“The process with the county has been great,” Young says, “and
(program manager) Richard Franz-Ünder was very helpful.”
The county’s Residential Green Building Program recognizes efforts
for both new construction and certain remodeling jobs. Based on
criteria supplied on the program’s Web site (See www.PimaXpress.com, and click on the
“Green Building” tab at the top of the page), points are awarded in six
categories, ranging from location to water efficiency.
This latter category gives points for rainwater harvesting and
graywater reuse, among other items. Points can also be obtained for not
having a swimming pool and not installing an under-sink
garbage-disposal system.
Based on the total points awarded, four levels of recognition are
available. The program is free for participants, and technical
assistance is provided.
“Our system provides the kind of ideas that people might not have
thought about,” Franz-Ünder says of the county program, “about how
to make the home more green.”
In addition, he adds: “Participation may help with the resale or
original sale of the home”.
While the severe downturn in home construction has impacted the
number of program participants, there are currently 11 single-family
homes and an assisted living facility enrolled, in addition to Young’s
house.
Participating single-family homeowners, Franz-Ünder says, may
be interested in the use of innovative green materials, passive solar
strategies and building-frame technologies.
On the other hand, he notes that people developing “green”
assisted-living centers may want to concentrate on things such as
internal air-quality issues.
That is the case with a project planned for Swan and Fort Lowell
roads. Because his assisted-living project is directed at people at
least 85 years old, Jerry Sonenblick says: “90 percent of them have
respiratory ailments, and my responsibility as the owner is to help
people breathe.”
To achieve that goal, Sonenblick is participating in another
residential green building program offered by Pima County. Coordinated
by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), the LEED for Homes Program
is also based on a points system awarded in several categories.
“LEED (for Homes) promotes and documents high-performance green
homes that are healthier, more comfortable and have lower utility
bills,” Franz-Ünder wrote about this approach to building.
Whereas the Pima County program is free, participation in the LEED
process can cost an individual homeowner a $525 USGBC fee, as well as
more than $1,000 to cover expenses associated with Pima County’s
involvement. Costs per home in a new subdivision can be somewhat
lower.
Despite the expense involved, Franz-Ünder says, the LEED
program is more popular with homebuilders than the free county
alternative; a westside subdivision and two assisted-living facilities
are participating.
“People say the national standard is important to them,”
Franz-Ünder explains.
Going green may be more expensive, at least in the short-term,
according to Franz-Ünder.
“You do see some extra costs depending on the homeowner’s interest,”
he says of single-family projects, “such as in water-harvesting and
windows.”
At the same time, Franz-Ünder continues: “If a subdivision
builder takes an existing home plan and says, ‘I’m going to green
this,’ it will cost them more. But if they rethink (how they’re doing
things) from the bottom up, there’s no extra cost involved.”
Plus, Franz-Ünder emphasizes, any short-term expense of going
green will be greatly offset by lower long-term costs.
“Lifecycle costs are important,” he says. “Take windows as an
example. Green windows add more value to a house, and they increase
energy efficiency.”
In addition to these benefits, the USGBC reports that a 2007
Washington state study showed green homes were worth up to 37 percent
more than conventional houses and sold considerably faster when put on
the market.
Addressing the current status of green home building programs in
Pima County, Franz-Ünder says: “People are interested in the
concept, but the details can become overwhelming, and documentation
needs to be done. So I’m doing a lot of education right now.”
As for the future: “My goal is to have 50 percent of all homes
(under construction) enrolled in one of the green building programs
when we come out of the current downturn,” he says.
He’s especially interested in the site and location criteria of the
two programs, Franz-Ünder says. “If you pick a spot in the middle
of nowhere to build, you’ll have to work really hard to make up for it
in the rest of the point system.”
With Earth Day being celebrated soon, Franz-Ünder says about
Pima County’s green-building programs: “Everybody should be doing
this!”
This article appears in Apr 2-8, 2009.
